Can you truly enjoy a shooter by credit feeding or sucking?

[Paradigm]

That's a leap in logic you made. How do you even begin to measure "true enjoyment"? A brain MRI scan of a gamer? It's really all the same when you're dealing with the reward centre of the brain: dopamine, serotonin, and endorphins (or whichever neurochemicals are involved) go into overdrive no matter what. In a way, people don't have much control over what they find a "rewarding and enjoyable" experience. They just do something repeatedly because they like it. In essence, you can't tell me how and when I will have a good time

You just don't get it.

You misunderstood the point of my earlier post as well.

[TonK]

That's a leap in logic you made. How do you even begin to measure "true enjoyment"? A brain MRI scan of a gamer? It's really all the same when you're dealing with the reward centre of the brain: dopamine, serotonin, and endorphins (or whichever neurochemicals are involved) go into overdrive no matter what. In a way, people don't have much control over what they find a "rewarding and enjoyable" experience. They just do something repeatedly because they like it. In essence, you can't tell me how and when I will have a good time

You just don't get it.

You misunderstood the point of my earlier post as well.

For real.

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

Good replies man.

[BulletMagnet]

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

Nobody's disputing this, but the question at hand is, how close to mastery does one have to get before he crosses the line from "not enjoyment" to "enjoyment"? Is there anything close to a definable point where and when this happens, or is it different for everybody - i.e. can one person whose top score is 20% of the world record be having as much fun as someone who can get 80% of the way there? And by extension, can/should the latter tell the former that if he thinks he's having fun, he's just deluding himself?

[TonK]

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

Nobody's disputing this, but the question at hand is, how close to mastery does one have to get before he crosses the line from "not enjoyment" to "enjoyment"? Is there anything close to a definable point where and when this happens, or is it different for everybody - i.e. can one person whose top score is 20% of the world record be having as much fun as someone who can get 80% of the way there? And by extension, can/should the latter tell the former that if he thinks he's having fun, he's just deluding himself?

Like I said.

I believe there is a difference here.

I'll never be a top scorer.

I just think these games aren't for everyone.

Why would you spend so much money on something you can't play?

If you're making progress, fine. But if you genuinely suck at Mushi Futari - you shouldn't own it.

And credit feeding can't possibly make these games fun.

I mean, some people have their strengths and weaknesses.

I don't play fighters, I plain suck at them.

And having the other players online whoop my ass wasn't fun.

I don't play fighting games.

[captpain]

people who casually strum chords to songs they know on the guitar (shmups: casually playing, occasionally popping another credit in, at least working with the mechanics of the game a little) are having fun, even if they're not playing the concierto de aranjuez with a major symphony orchestra. now, if they were sort of batting at the guitar with their hands and putting spare change in the sound hole and so on (picking up dodonpachi, not understanding the difference between laser/shot, not even being aware of the chaining system, credit feeding without even knowing that the game is intended to be 1cced and so on) and then telling people how much they loved the guitar, you might raise an eyebrow.

really though i think if anyone takes anything seriously and has some good instruction from experts they can get very skilled at it. as long as they practice seriously. i have no doubt if i took shmups as seriously as i took some other things in my life, my scores would improve drastically, but i'm happy with just semi- or occasional seriousness because i have no real lasting interest in actually attacking them. that's still enjoying the games.

most importantly, there are differing degrees of rewards based on skill level, practice time, level of interest, etc., and the rewards usually increase as the level of "seriousness" increases, but ignorant enjoyment of shmups is not enjoyment except on a superficial level.

[ancestral-knowledge]

Maybe my girlfriend is one example of enjoying these games casually.

She bought Akai Katana along with Viva Pinata ( ). She plays the game every day for maybe 2-3 credits. Sometimes i watch, but i have no clue about Akai Katana so i don't fully understand what's going on. She plays, arrives at Stage 4 and dies there everytime on the boss or sometimes earlier in the game. After that she doesn't continue and gives the game another go if she feels like it. To see the whole game she has credit-fed it about 2 times.
When she is at stage 4 she sometimes credit feeds when she dies shortly before the boss. This allows her to practise the 4th boss, but as far as i see she doesn't use the extra bombs or whatever to just bomb the boss to death. She plays the 4th boss as if she has really reached it so she only bombs 2 or 3 times. This way the extra credit allows her to destroy the boss and she goes into stage 5. When she dies there after the first extra credit she never continues.
When she plays she screams, laughs and about everything else we all do during a sitting of these intense games but she has never played a game to the point like many here, where you start to hate the game or restart after every tiny screwup or just start to blame that your ship is the weakest one or that the game is unbalanced. I asked her how she likes the game and she says it's the best game she has ever played after Bayonetta and Tales of the Abyss (yeah lol).
She only plays for survival which judging from seeing her play seems like the most natural way to approach a shooter. She knows that there are guys who attempt to set high scores but she would never do that. She scores purposely only for one reason in the earlier stages: to get an extend which allows her to reach further. If scoring would not provide extends she would not give a damn about these numbers. Maybe she's right. I often fail to see what's the point in being the 1856754th best in a game, it means nothing.

I would NEVER go to her and try to convince her that she has to play for score or that playing with a particular ship is better or that she never is allowed to bomb because some internet elite heroes on shmups forums (with all respect) think that this is the right way to play. The only think i was doing is explaining to her why it's pointless to credit-feed through such a game and from the style she plays described above i know she understands.


Good Night everyone

[Aliquantic]

I asked a few players at casino if they would rather improve on their score but die by level 4 or have a poorer score but get the clear, and surprisingly (to me) most said they would rather improve their score. At the recent shmup meet anytime someone got a 1cc or came close to a 2-ALL it was greeted with a round of applause - the score seemed secondary.

That's interesting coming from you since you seemed to be quite fond of scoring systems to me (and your favorite game is Deathsmiles, the poster child for being very easy to 1cc if that's all you want, and as insane as you can get as soon as you go for score!). I wonder if it's not just a difference between familiar and unfamiliar games? If I see someone play a game I know nothing about, I won't be impressed by scoring or the lack thereof, but survival is easy enough to witness and praise!

On the other hand, when you know a game well, score starts acting as an indicator of your degree of control over the game (I've yet to see a game where scoring doesn't interfere with survival to some degree), and it's also another way to gauge your progress when "I've survived for 30 seconds longer this time" starts to feel unsatisfying, or even when you start to regress/not notice any improvement at all. And of course, it's a lot easier to marvel at someone's masterful play when you're familiar with the game yourself and can understand how intricate that milking/chaining/execution is.

I'd add that you don't need to compare yourself to other players to enjoy scoring (in response to the previous post), but you can treat it as a competition against the game instead, or merely as a way to motivate yourself to push harder on your skills... especially when you've reached the point where you can 1cc the game more or less at will, and there's not much else to shoot for (assuming it doesn't loop) other than scoring or other self-imposed challenges (like no-miss/no-bomb). Scoring isn't really the opposite of survival, but the two can work quite well together, I think

[chempop]

Growing up I loved Basketball. I played on a team, had a small court in my back yard, collected cards, and watched tons of NCAA & NBA games on TV. I loved the Utah Jazz, John Stockton was my hero. I had 5 Utah Jazz hats, a Stockton Jersey, and 2 Jazz Starter jackets. I cried when the Jazz lost to Chicago in the finals, and I still talk about how Stockton's assist record will never be beaten. You'd be crazy if you thought I didn't truly enjoy Basketball.

I was never very good at Basketball.

[xbl0x180]

That's a leap in logic you made. How do you even begin to measure "true enjoyment"? A brain MRI scan of a gamer? It's really all the same when you're dealing with the reward centre of the brain: dopamine, serotonin, and endorphins (or whichever neurochemicals are involved) go into overdrive no matter what. In a way, people don't have much control over what they find a "rewarding and enjoyable" experience. They just do something repeatedly because they like it. In essence, you can't tell me how and when I will have a good time

You just don't get it.

You misunderstood the point of my earlier post as well.

Hahah. I don't "get" how to have a good time? Um, not to further convolute things, but I was being facetious in my reply to your post. It can certainly read as being sarcastic to an outsider such as myself, but I knew you were serious - just like most replies equating top scoring/1-ccing with "true enjoyment." I wouldn't question how and why people perceive "love" and "enjoyment" in an activity because it is subjective. If a person tells me they enjoy an activity, I'll simply take them at their word. Really, it's none of my concern unless it is me who is getting in the way of their enjoying said activity.

Do you get that perspective?

That's a leap in logic you made. How do you even begin to measure "true enjoyment"? A brain MRI scan of a gamer? It's really all the same when you're dealing with the reward centre of the brain: dopamine, serotonin, and endorphins (or whichever neurochemicals are involved) go into overdrive no matter what. In a way, people don't have much control over what they find a "rewarding and enjoyable" experience. They just do something repeatedly because they like it. In essence, you can't tell me how and when I will have a good time

You just don't get it.

You misunderstood the point of my earlier post as well.

For real.

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

Good replies man.

No. I didn't misunderstand his post. I do understand that for you, "true enjoyment" of this kind of video game means scoring really high or beating it without dying or continuing. It is not the same for me, but I do love and enjoy the same games. F'real, man

Maybe my girlfriend is one example of enjoying these games casually.

She bought Akai Katana along with Viva Pinata ( ). She plays the game every day for maybe 2-3 credits. Sometimes i watch, but i have no clue about Akai Katana so i don't fully understand what's going on. She plays, arrives at Stage 4 and dies there everytime on the boss or sometimes earlier in the game. After that she doesn't continue and gives the game another go if she feels like it. To see the whole game she has credit-fed it about 2 times.
When she is at stage 4 she sometimes credit feeds when she dies shortly before the boss. This allows her to practise the 4th boss, but as far as i see she doesn't use the extra bombs or whatever to just bomb the boss to death. She plays the 4th boss as if she has really reached it so she only bombs 2 or 3 times. This way the extra credit allows her to destroy the boss and she goes into stage 5. When she dies there after the first extra credit she never continues.
When she plays she screams, laughs and about everything else we all do during a sitting of these intense games but she has never played a game to the point like many here, where you start to hate the game or restart after every tiny screwup or just start to blame that your ship is the weakest one or that the game is unbalanced. I asked her how she likes the game and she says it's the best game she has ever played after Bayonetta and Tales of the Abyss (yeah lol).
She only plays for survival which judging from seeing her play seems like the most natural way to approach a shooter. She knows that there are guys who attempt to set high scores but she would never do that. She scores purposely only for one reason in the earlier stages: to get an extend which allows her to reach further. If scoring would not provide extends she would not give a damn about these numbers. Maybe she's right. I often fail to see what's the point in being the 1856754th best in a game, it means nothing.

I would NEVER go to her and try to convince her that she has to play for score or that playing with a particular ship is better or that she never is allowed to bomb because some internet elite heroes on shmups forums (with all respect) think that this is the right way to play. The only think i was doing is explaining to her why it's pointless to credit-feed through such a game and from the style she plays described above i know she understands.


Good Night everyone

Bingo.

Holy carp! Hahahah. I also have Viva Pinata. Who knew that raising those paper mache critters could be such an addictive blast?

[toaplan_shmupfan]

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

But then there's Silpheed for the Sega CD.

It gives 5 continue credits on the default difficulty.

Continuing restarts the stage from the beginning, with the player's score from the beginning of that stage.

So, for example, if a player got to stage 4 with a score of 221,720... lost their last turn at the stage 4 boss... when they continued, they'd start again at the beginning of stage 4, with a score of 221, 720.

I don't have a problem with how that's done. They lose the points they earned up to the stage 4 boss when they got game over, but they don't lose all their progress unless they used up their last continue credit.

The game also has a you continued x times counter at the status screen following the Game Over.

[Randorama]

Ok, let me try to pin-point down some concepts that seem to be too slippery, in this discussion.

These games are meant for score attack and extreme practice, dedication.

Nobody's disputing this, but the question at hand is, how close to mastery does one have to get before he crosses the line from "not enjoyment" to "enjoyment"?

There can also be enjoyment from mucking around, i.e. from playing "casually", without a fixed goal. When one is tired of doing this with a game, then either enjoyment from learning is the successive step, or moving onto another game is the one. The basic idea is as follows.

Enjoyment from learning (in this case, becoming better at a shmup) comes from successfully improving one's skills and reaching a given temporary goal, within the individual's limits. If one gets better on a daily base, one will likely take pleasure from this improvement. Say, if one decides to improve from 10% to 11% of the world record within a couple of hours of practice, then meeting this goal should be pleasant, as long as it is feasible. Trying to meet unrealistic goals is always a source of stress: if one can't go from 10% to 15% in three plays, the experience should be pretty stressful.

Is there anything close to a definable point where and when this happens, or is it different for everybody - i.e. can one person whose top score is 20% of the world record be having as much fun as someone who can get 80% of the way there?

This question becomes slippery. Insofar as one meets one's goal, such as improvement, the whole journey from 0% to 100% is pleasant, if done at the correct path. Arbitrary standards are, well, just arbitrary, and stem from chest-beaters who want to tell others when they're supposed to enjoy things. What's the evidence in favor of this normative argument, aside a lot of trolling on forums?

And by extension, can/should the latter tell the former that if he thinks he's having fun, he's just deluding himself?

The latter should stfu and gtfo, plzkhtx.

[Demetori]

I　play them because I　like sprites, explosions and strange themes. I　don't give a flying fuck if I'm ass at the game. I'll credit feed all I　want in an arcade, they get my money, I get my *15minutes of satisfaction.

*Varies depending on the game, duh

[Treasurance]

no
I can't possibly suck so it has to be the game that sucks

[Illyrian]

For me after the initial period of flailing around with a new shmup, my practice involves just going over the first few stages initially until I have an aggressive scoring path down. I generally worry about the other stages after that. To give you some idea, I played Espgaluda II yesterday on my xbox, and restarted the first level probably close to 60-70 times to get a proper aggressive scoring line down. On any one of those runs I could have just carried on instead, and probably got a game over on level 4.

The difference is that I only do this because I'm sitting at home. If I'm in an arcade I'm not gonna deliberately get a game over because I made one scoring mistake, I'm gonna try and survive so my money goes as far as possible. As I've never been able to put the time into a shmup I'd need to to get truly masterful at it (apart from Blue Wish Resurrection lol) The scoring is just a way of getting extra lives really.

I think if you're new to a genre it's more important to try lots of different games and see if you can find one which you really want to focus on. I personally thought it would be Progear but I found out (this was like 3 years ago) I just wasn't very good at manipulating the scoring system and from about level 4 onwards I just found the game frustrating. Looking at progear now I could probably put the time in and try harder and do better.

tl:dr I think new players should do whatever they want until they find a game they really really like, then focus on that, and try to go for that 1cc!!

[TrevHead (TVR)]

For me it depends on the individual game and how im feeling at the time.

Ill usually have one STG that im trying to improve on for the 1CC / score, but then Ill play some random Mame game and credit feed through it, others ill stop at 1 or 2 credits because I might play it for seriously at a later date and dont want to spoil it.

I do think that there is a massive difference in us guys choosing to creditfeed and some mainstream gamer who doesnt know any better. I would suspect that most of us here even when we're credifeeding are still playing with some degree of skill and arnt been overwhelmed and completely out of their depth. Personally I think that everybody who plays arcade games need to have 1CCed something even if its relativly easy just so they know about and that because they are playing in a simplistic way doesnt mean the game itself is the same.

Besides not everything is black and white when it comes to 1cc / creditfeeding / score. For example I played DDP for the first time in over a year I got to the end of stage 4 and even though I was still aiming to see how far I could get on one credit I thought fuck it and creditfeed my way to the credits

[TonK]

Growing up I loved Basketball. I played on a team, had a small court in my back yard, collected cards, and watched tons of NCAA & NBA games on TV. I loved the Utah Jazz, John Stockton was my hero. I had 5 Utah Jazz hats, a Stockton Jersey, and 2 Jazz Starter jackets. I cried when the Jazz lost to Chicago in the finals, and I still talk about how Stockton's assist record will never be beaten. You'd be crazy if you thought I didn't truly enjoy Basketball.

I was never very good at Basketball.

But you put the effort into your hobby.

You absolutely loved the game, you tried your hardest.

You made lay-ups, threes, free throws, around the world, maybe even a half court or two. But you couldn't dunk.

You knew everything about the game.

If I asked you a question about basketball you would tell me the answer.

The kind of people I'm talking about read strategy guides and think they know the game.

[dpful]

People are just different, and get different things from shmups, and enjoy it if they get it, whether it's a 1cc, and improving score, and explosion, a set piece, music, etc. What really matters is that people are different. When one person thinks a 1cc is a waste of time, and another things a credit feed is a waste of time, it's because they have fundamental differences in personality that won't be bridged intuitively.

However, my personality has led me along this path:
Explosions and ships and sounds
Survival play
Score play
1cc play
---but honestly still having an intense appreciation for everything on the list. My 1cc's are just extensions of survival play, and I don't write down my high scores unless I'm in competition.

[xbl0x180]

The kind of people I'm talking about read strategy guides and think they know the game.

They know more about it than I would. I don't have the patience to read any strategy guide (unless it's for picking up women ). Seriously, if anyone bothers to go to that extent [they might not know the game], then they enjoy it enough to seek out more/extra information about it.